DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/23/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation is: a target identification system configured to identify a characteristic of the anatomical target based at least in part on the at least the portion of the second optical signal in claims 1 and 13, wherein paragraph [0054] of applicant’s specification provides details of a target identification system to include an optical splitter 114 (also referred to as a beam splitter) and a spectroscopy system 115.
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 6, 8, 13, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0377134) in view of Otani et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0242981).
Consider claims 1, 13, Yi discloses a medical system (paragraph [0044], optical coherence tomography (OCT) techniques to obtain extra-dimensional images of tissue samples) comprising:
a probe (paragraph [0125], Figs. 10A, 10B, probe 480) including at least one optical pathway configured to pass (i) a first optical signal to an anatomical target (paragraphs [0125] to [0130], Figs. 10A, 10B, sample beam 435A is emitted from mirror 486 (output port 434A) and (ii) at least a portion of a second optical signal from the anatomical target in response to illumination of the anatomical target (paragraph [0130], Fig. 10B, sample beam 435A reflects off various structures within the tissue sample back to the optical probe 480 wherein mirror 486 directs the reflected sample beam 435A back to port 434A);
an optical splitter (paragraph [0122], Fig. 10A, fiber coupler 430 is a 95:5 splitter) optically coupled to the probe, the optical splitter (paragraph [0124], Fig. 10A, fiber coupler 430 is optically coupled to an optical probe 480) including:
a target identification system (Fig. 10A, spectrometer 470A, 470B) configured to identify a characteristic of the anatomical target based at least in part on the at least the portion of the second optical signal (paragraph [0130], data from the spectrometers 470A and 470B can be used to analyze and create images of the tissue sample (e.g., analyze colon tissue to detect markers of colon cancer, see paragraph [0124])).
Yi, in the current embodiment, does not specifically disclose optics configured to redirect the at least a portion of the second optical signal.
Yi, in another embodiment, discloses optics (paragraph [0080], Fig. 2A, mirrors 244A, 244B wherein the mirrors can be used as needed for the design of the system 200) configured to redirect the at least a portion of the second optical signal (paragraph [0081], Fig. 2A, after reflection, the electromagnetic radiation of the sample beam 235A propagates back through the various optical components (to include mirrors 244A, 244B) to port 234A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medical system in the current embodiment as disclosed by Yi with the medical system as taught by Yi in another embodiment in order to provide mirrors and lenses to be used as needed for the design of the system (Yi, paragraph [0080]).
Yi does not specifically disclose a shield configured to prevent over-projection of the first optical signal from back-projecting into the at least one optical pathway, while allowing at least the portion of the second optical signal to pass into the at least one optical pathway.
Otani discloses a shield configured to prevent over-projection of the first optical signal from back-projecting into the at least one optical pathway, while allowing at least the portion of the second optical signal to pass into the at least one optical pathway (paragraph [0071], fixed light shielding portion 15b prevent part of projected light from the LD 2a from becoming stray light and entering the light receiving space K2 from the light projecting space K1, and prevent part of reflected light from the target 50 from becoming stray light and entering the light projecting space K1 from the light receiving space K2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the shield as disclosed by Yi with the shield as taught by Otani to effectively reduce the likelihood of stray light (Otani, paragraph [0071]).
Consider claims 6, 16, the combination of Yi and Otani discloses wherein the optics of the optical splitter includes one or more of a collimating lens, a focusing lens, or a biconvex lens configured to direct the first optical signal towards a first port of the optical splitter (paragraph [0071], Fig. 2A, collimating lenses 219A and 219B).
Consider claims 8, 17, the combination of Yi and Otani discloses wherein the first optical signal includes a laser output from a laser system (paragraph [0066], Figs. 2, 10A, broad-spectrum electromagnetic radiation source 204/404 produces electromagnetic radiation wherein the radiation source 204/404 is a supercontinuum laser) optically coupled to the optical splitter via a second port thereof (paragraph [0122], Fig. 10A, combined visible and near infrared electromagnetic radiation (from broad-spectrum electromagnetic radiation source 404, see paragraph [0121]) is directed to port 432A of fiber coupler 430).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yi and Otani in view of Mizuno (Pub. No.: US 2004/0147810).
Consider claim 2, the combination of Yi and Otani discloses a first port (Fig. 10A, port 434A) configured to be coupled to the probe (paragraph [0124], port 434A of the fiber coupler 430 is optically coupled to optical probe 480) to direct the first optical signal to the at least one optical pathway (paragraph [0125], fiber from port 434A of the fiber coupler 430 (which carries the sample beam 435A of electromagnetic radiation) is inserted into a housing 482 of the optical probe 480) and to receive the at least the portion of the second optical signal from the at least one optical pathway (paragraph [0130], Fig. 10B, sample beam 435A reflects off various structures within the tissue sample back to port 434A).
The combination of Yi and Otani does not specifically disclose wherein the shield is proximate to the first port of the optical splitter.
Mizuno discloses wherein the shield (paragraphs [0042], [0043], Fig. 2, aperture plate 150 is a light shielding member) is proximate to the first port of the optical splitter (paragraph [0042], Fig. 2, aperture plate 150 is a light shielding member attached on the first surface 191 of the first micro focusing lens array plate 140 which faces the beam splitter cube 130 and the first surface 191 faces the aperture plate 150, see paragraph [0037], Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the optical splitter as disclosed by the combination of Yi and Otani with the optical splitter as taught by Mizuno to allow for emerging laser beams to enter the objective lens system (Mizuno, paragraph [0043]).
Claims 3, 4, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yi and Otani in view of Rebec et al. (Pub. No.: US 2009/0177052).
Consider claims 3, 14, the combination of Yi and Otani wherein the optics of the optical splitter includes a reflector (paragraph [0080], Fig. 2A, mirrors 244A, 244B wherein the mirrors can be used as needed for the design of the system 200) configured to redirect the at least the portion of the second optical signal towards the target identification system (paragraph [0081], Fig. 2A, after reflection, the electromagnetic radiation of the sample beam 235A propagates back through the various optical components (to include mirrors 244A, 244B) to port 234A).
Yi does not specifically disclose a parabolic reflector.
Rebec discloses a parabolic reflector (paragraph [0026], Fig. 2, parabolic mirror 40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the optics as disclosed by the combination of Yi and Otani with the reflector as taught by Rebec in order for an analyte concentration to be determined from the collected Raman signal (Rebec, paragraph [0026]).
Consider claims 4, 15, the combination of Yi, Otani, and Rebec discloses wherein the optics of the optical splitter further includes one or more reflectors positioned relative to the parabolic reflector and configured to direct the at least the portion of the second optical signal towards the target identification system (paragraph [0081], Fig. 2A, after reflection, the electromagnetic radiation of the sample beam 235A propagates back through the various optical components (to include mirrors 244A, 244B, see paragraph [0079], Fig. 2A) to port 234A which are optically coupled to output ports 264A, 264B of spectrometers 270A, 270B, see paragraphs [0083] to [0087]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yi, Otani, and Rebec in view of Mizuno.
Consider claim 5, the combination of Yi, Otani, and Rebec does not specifically disclose wherein the optical splitter includes a third port coupled to the target identification system, wherein the optics is configured to direct the at least the portion of the second optical signal to the third port of the optical splitter.
Mizuno discloses wherein the optical splitter includes a third port (paragraph [0031], Figs. 2, 4, proximal end surface 130c) coupled to the target identification system (paragraph [0065], Fig. 4, converts the laser beams into electric signals to generate image signals and sends the image signals to the image processing circuitry image processing circuitry 310), wherein the optics is configured to direct the at least the portion of the second optical signal to the third port of the optical splitter (paragraph [0065], reflected laser beams emitted from the optical fiber bundle 604 transmit through the first micro focusing lens array plate 140 and the beam splitter cube 130 toward the image processing circuitry 310).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace optical splitter as disclosed by the combination of Yi, Otani, and Rebec with the optical splitter as taught by Mizuno for processing the image signals to produce an observation image which is displayed on the monitor 404 through the personal computer 400 (Mizuno, paragraph [0065]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yi and Otani in view of Heniford et al. (Pub. No.: US 2016/0081712).
Consider claim 7, the combination of Yi and Otani wherein the optics of the optical splitter includes one or more lenses configured to redirect the at least the portion of the second optical signal to the target identification system (paragraph [0081], Fig. 2A, after reflection, the electromagnetic radiation of the sample beam 235A propagates back through the various optical components (to include collimating lens 240, see paragraph [0078], Fig. 2A) to port 234A which are optically coupled to output ports 264A, 264B of spectrometers 270A, 270B, see paragraphs [0083] to [0087]).
The combination of Yi and Otani does not specifically disclose wherein the optics of the optical splitter includes one or more lenses with a reflective coating.
Henifold discloses wherein the optics of the optical splitter includes one or more lenses with a reflective coating (paragraph [0050], Fig. 3, reflective coating 62 disposed on optical lens 56).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the one or more lenses as disclosed by the combination of Yi and Otani with the one or more lenses as taught by Henifold to provide reflection of a portion of the light emitted by a light source back to the imaging system and in particular, a reference beam that is reflected back to the imaging system, such as to an interferometer (Henifold, paragraph [0050]).
Claims 9, 10, 11, 12, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yi and Otani in view of Akashi et al. (Pub. No.: US 2002/0136249).
Consider claims 9, 18, the combination of Yi and Otani does not specifically disclose wherein the optical splitter further includes at least one temperature sensor configured to sense a temperature of at least one component of the optics in response to emission of the laser output.
Akashi discloses wherein the optical splitter (paragraph [0053], Fig. 9, the laser 70 and optical splitter 71 are mounted on the same TEC (thermoelectric cooler)) further includes at least one temperature sensor (paragraph [0050], Fig. 9, thermosensitive element such as a thermistor 83) to sense a temperature of at least one component of the optics in response to emission of the laser output (paragraph [0050], Fig. 9, thermosensitive element such as a thermistor detects any variation in laser temperature arising from a change in injected current).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the optical splitter as disclosed by the combination of Yi and Otani with the optical splitter as taught by Akashi in order to support stabilization of the oscillation wavelength (Akashi, paragraph [0050]).
Consider claim 10, the combination of Yi, Otani, and Akashi discloses wherein the at least one temperature sensor is attached to a surface of the at least one component of the optics (Akashi, paragraph [0053], Fig. 9, the laser 70 and optical splitter 71 are mounted on the same TEC (thermoelectric cooler)).
Consider claims 11, 19, the combination of Yi, Otani, and Akashi discloses a controller circuit configured to generate an overheating diagnostic based at least in part on the sensed temperature of the at least one component of the optics (Akashi, paragraph [0053], a temperature control circuit for receiving the resultant comparison signal and controlling the temperature of the TEC).
Consider claims 12, 20, the combination of Yi, Otani, and Akashi discloses wherein the controller circuit (Akashi, Fig. 9, optical wavelength compensation circuit 81) configured to generate a control signal to adjust an output setting of the laser system based at least in part on the sensed temperature of the at least one component of the optics (Akashi, paragraph [0050], Fig. 9, compensation circuits for adding to the comparator a signal to compensate for the quantity of optical wavelength variation matching any variation in the power injected into the laser wherein compensation circuit 81 is stored with a compensation voltage matching a variation in laser temperature, see paragraph [0050]).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,523,865 in view of Otani et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0242981).
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. US 11,523,865
1. A medical system comprising: a probe including at least one optical pathway configured to pass (i) a first optical signal to an anatomical target and (ii) at least a portion of a second optical signal from the anatomical target in response to illumination of the anatomical target; an optical splitter optically coupled to the probe, the optical splitter including: a shield configured to prevent over-projection of the first optical signal from back-projecting into the at least one optical pathway, while allowing at least the portion of the second optical signal to pass into the at least one optical pathway; and optics configured to redirect at least the portion of the second optical signal; and a target identification system configured to identify a characteristic of the anatomical target based at least in part on the at least the portion of the second optical signal.
1. A system comprising: a probe having a first end and a second end, the second end configured to locate adjacent an anatomical target, the probe configured to define a first optical path, the first optical path configured to simultaneously pass a first optical signal to the anatomical target and a second optical signal from the anatomical target; a spectroscopy system; and a beam splitter comprising: a first port coupled to the first end of the probe; a second port configured to align with the first optical path and configured to pass the first optical signal; and a first reflector and a second reflector serially positioned along the first optical path, the first reflector configured to redirect at least a portion of the second optical signal towards the spectroscopy system, and the second reflector configured to merge the first optical path and a second optical path; wherein the beam splitter is configured to redirect the at least a portion of the second optical signal from the first optical path and from the first optical signal; wherein the spectroscopy system is optically coupled to the beam splitter and configured to (i) receive the redirected at least a portion of the second optical signal and (ii) based at least in part thereon, identify a characteristic of the anatomical target.
The patent discloses fails to disclose a shield configured to prevent over-projection of the first optical signal from back-projecting into the at least one optical pathway, while allowing at least the portion of the second optical signal to pass into the at least one optical pathway.
Otani discloses a shield configured to prevent over-projection of the first optical signal from back-projecting into the at least one optical pathway, while allowing at least the portion of the second optical signal to pass into the at least one optical pathway (paragraph [0071], fixed light shielding portion 15b prevent part of projected light from the LD 2a from becoming stray light and entering the light receiving space K2 from the light projecting space K1, and prevent part of reflected light from the target 50 from becoming stray light and entering the light projecting space K1 from the light receiving space K2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify target identification system as disclosed by the patent to include the shield as taught by Otani to effectively reduce the likelihood of stray light (Otani, paragraph [0071]).
Claim 1 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,329,940 in view of Otani et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0242981).
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. 12,329,940
1. A medical system comprising: a probe including at least one optical pathway configured to pass (i) a first optical signal to an anatomical target and (ii) at least a portion of a second optical signal from the anatomical target in response to illumination of the anatomical target; an optical splitter optically coupled to the probe, the optical splitter including: a shield configured to prevent over-projection of the first optical signal from back-projecting into the at least one optical pathway, while allowing at least the portion of the second optical signal to pass into the at least one optical pathway; and optics configured to redirect at least the portion of the second optical signal; and a target identification system configured to identify a characteristic of the anatomical target based at least in part on the at least the portion of the second optical signal.
1. A target identification system comprising: a probe including a first optical pathway configured to pass (i) a first optical signal to an anatomical target and (ii) at least a portion of a second optical signal from the anatomical target responsive to illumination of the anatomical target; an optical splitter comprising: a first port coupled to the probe and configured to (i) direct the first optical signal to the first optical pathway and (ii) receive the at least a portion of the second optical signal from the first optical pathway; a second port configured to receive the first optical signal produced by a signal generator; a third port separate from the first and the second ports; and a parabolic reflector configured to redirect the at least a portion of the second optical signal towards the third port along a second optical pathway different from the first optical pathway; and an optical detecting system optically coupled to the third port, the optical detecting system configured to (i) receive the redirected at least a portion of the second optical signal, and (ii) based at least in part thereon, identify a characteristic of the anatomical target.
The patent discloses fails to disclose a shield configured to prevent over-projection of the first optical signal from back-projecting into the at least one optical pathway, while allowing at least the portion of the second optical signal to pass into the at least one optical pathway.
Otani discloses a shield configured to prevent over-projection of the first optical signal from back-projecting into the at least one optical pathway, while allowing at least the portion of the second optical signal to pass into the at least one optical pathway (paragraph [0071], fixed light shielding portion 15b prevent part of projected light from the LD 2a from becoming stray light and entering the light receiving space K2 from the light projecting space K1, and prevent part of reflected light from the target 50 from becoming stray light and entering the light projecting space K1 from the light receiving space K2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify target identification system as disclosed by the patent to include the shield as taught by Otani to effectively reduce the likelihood of stray light (Otani, paragraph [0071]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERALD JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carey Michael can be reached at (571)270-7235. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Gerald Johnson/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797